Stupid pointless CFLs
 

Today, ****ed off with the gloom emitted by CFLs, I did a test replacing
downlighters with halogen and LED bulbs.

I didn't hold out much hope for the LEDs, 3W as replacements for 14W CFL in
a fitting that used to provide good light with a 25W E25 reflector bulb.
The halogens were 20W.

Best bulb of the lot the 3W 16 x LED. Really bright. Good light dispersion
and a revelation after the poxy CFL. That's nailed the coffin on the CFLs,
living room now brightly lit with just 12W instead of inadequately lit with
56W of CFL.

Anyone who bangs on at me about how great CFLs are in future will leave
with one stuck up his arse.

--
€¢DarWin|
_/ _/

Stupid pointless CFLs
 

"Steve Firth" wrote in message
...
Today, ****ed off with the gloom emitted by CFLs, I did a test replacing
downlighters with halogen and LED bulbs.

I didn't hold out much hope for the LEDs, 3W as replacements for 14W CFL
in
a fitting that used to provide good light with a 25W E25 reflector bulb.
The halogens were 20W.

Best bulb of the lot the 3W 16 x LED. Really bright. Good light dispersion
and a revelation after the poxy CFL. That's nailed the coffin on the CFLs,
living room now brightly lit with just 12W instead of inadequately lit
with
56W of CFL.

Anyone who bangs on at me about how great CFLs are in future will leave
with one stuck up his arse.

I have a 25W one in a standard lamp, just about adequate. But yes, on the
whole they're crap.

Stupid pointless CFLs
 

On Sunday, October 14, 2012 10:59:35 PM UTC+1, Steve Firth wrote:
Today, ****ed off with the gloom emitted by CFLs, I did a test replacing

downlighters with halogen and LED bulbs.



I didn't hold out much hope for the LEDs, 3W as replacements for 14W CFL in

a fitting that used to provide good light with a 25W E25 reflector bulb.

The halogens were 20W.



Best bulb of the lot the 3W 16 x LED. Really bright. Good light dispersion

and a revelation after the poxy CFL. That's nailed the coffin on the CFLs,

living room now brightly lit with just 12W instead of inadequately lit with

56W of CFL.



Anyone who bangs on at me about how great CFLs are in future will leave

with one stuck up his arse.

So you didnt use enough wattage, and theyre all bad because of that. I'm totally convinced.


NT

Stupid pointless CFLs
 

wrote in message
...
On Sunday, October 14, 2012 10:59:35 PM UTC+1, Steve Firth wrote:
Today, ****ed off with the gloom emitted by CFLs, I did a test replacing

downlighters with halogen and LED bulbs.



I didn't hold out much hope for the LEDs, 3W as replacements for 14W CFL
in

a fitting that used to provide good light with a 25W E25 reflector bulb.

The halogens were 20W.



Best bulb of the lot the 3W 16 x LED. Really bright. Good light
dispersion

and a revelation after the poxy CFL. That's nailed the coffin on the
CFLs,

living room now brightly lit with just 12W instead of inadequately lit
with

56W of CFL.



Anyone who bangs on at me about how great CFLs are in future will leave

with one stuck up his arse.

So you didnt use enough wattage, and theyre all bad because of that. I'm
totally convinced.


NT

Steve is correct, they're crap unless you use a string of them. As normal
replacements they don't cut it (unless you replace 40W candles with 25W CFLs
'ish). In toilets they're completely useless (unless you know when you'll be
piddling and switch on beforehand).

Stupid pointless CFLs
 

On Sun, 14 Oct 2012 21:59:34 +0000 (UTC), Steve Firth
wrote:

Anyone who bangs on at me about how great CFLs are in future will leave
with one stuck up his arse.

And you now have some readily to hand. An easy way of disposal, but
might take some time.

Stupid pointless CFLs
 

wrote:

So you didnt use enough wattage, and theyre all bad because of that. I'm
totally convinced.


You need to learn to read dumbass.

I said the room was adequately lit with 100W of incandescent tungsten
lighting (4x25).

The 14W CFLs, largest wattage available in that package, were supposed
to be "equivalent" to 40W tungsten. They weren't they were equivalent to
12W tungsten at best. The 3W LED is at least as bright as the 25W
tungsten. It's an excellent bulb and also uses less electricity than the
CFL, which is ****. In all cases there are four (4) bulbs.

Was that too fast for the custard made with **** that someone filled
your skull with?


BTW, your line length is ****ed, your post is double spaced because you
are using the "new" Google groups which is reserved for trolls and
morons. Which one are you? Or in your case is it "both"?

Stupid pointless CFLs
 

In article ,
Steve Firth wrote:
wrote:

So you didnt use enough wattage, and theyre all bad because of that. I'm
totally convinced.


You need to learn to read dumbass.

I said the room was adequately lit with 100W of incandescent tungsten
lighting (4x25).

The 14W CFLs, largest wattage available in that package, were supposed
to be "equivalent" to 40W tungsten. They weren't they were equivalent to
12W tungsten at best. The 3W LED is at least as bright as the 25W
tungsten. It's an excellent bulb and also uses less electricity than the
CFL, which is ****. In all cases there are four (4) bulbs.

you obviously had some very bad CFLs. I find that those made by Megaman
are good. 4w 'golfballs' give out as much light as 25w tungsten - when in
a globe shade it is difficult to tell the difference. their 7w display
lamps are also good. On the other hand I loathed the Powerlink 7w "candle"
type that I had in the ceiling fittings here. They were supposed to repalce
40w tungsten and didn't. I now use 28w halogen.

LEDs are fine for spotlights (if you can afford them), not sure about them
for 'all round' illumination, though.

--
From KT24

Using a RISC OS computer running v5.18

Stupid pointless CFLs
 

Ah, if these are the horrible green dotty effect ones then I sympathise. I
cannot stand them in houses. Now I cannot see but I do have light perception
and these el cheapo ones give me a headache. They seem to create a kind of
dotty haze of interference in my retinas. The more expensive ones that are
white do not seem to do this at all. Thus Its either the el cheapo
electronics or the phosphor that is to blame.
Brian

--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
"Steve Firth" wrote in message
...
Today, ****ed off with the gloom emitted by CFLs, I did a test replacing
downlighters with halogen and LED bulbs.

I didn't hold out much hope for the LEDs, 3W as replacements for 14W CFL
in
a fitting that used to provide good light with a 25W E25 reflector bulb.
The halogens were 20W.

Best bulb of the lot the 3W 16 x LED. Really bright. Good light dispersion
and a revelation after the poxy CFL. That's nailed the coffin on the CFLs,
living room now brightly lit with just 12W instead of inadequately lit
with
56W of CFL.

Anyone who bangs on at me about how great CFLs are in future will leave
with one stuck up his arse.

--
.DarWin|
_/ _/

Stupid pointless CFLs
 

I think in downlighting systems, LEDs have the advantage as they can all
emit in the same direction. For all around lighting the cfl is probably
still better from the watts standpoint assuming the white sort not the orrid
dotty greeny ones.

Brian

--
From the Sofa of Brian Gaff Reply address is active
wrote in message
...
On Sunday, October 14, 2012 10:59:35 PM UTC+1, Steve Firth wrote:
Today, ****ed off with the gloom emitted by CFLs, I did a test replacing

downlighters with halogen and LED bulbs.



I didn't hold out much hope for the LEDs, 3W as replacements for 14W CFL
in

a fitting that used to provide good light with a 25W E25 reflector bulb.

The halogens were 20W.



Best bulb of the lot the 3W 16 x LED. Really bright. Good light
dispersion

and a revelation after the poxy CFL. That's nailed the coffin on the
CFLs,

living room now brightly lit with just 12W instead of inadequately lit
with

56W of CFL.



Anyone who bangs on at me about how great CFLs are in future will leave

with one stuck up his arse.

So you didnt use enough wattage, and theyre all bad because of that. I'm
totally convinced.


NT

Stupid pointless CFLs
 

On 15/10/2012 09:21, charles wrote:

you obviously had some very bad CFLs. I find that those made by Megaman
are good.

Philips Tornado bulbs are very good, too, but not cheap. 2 seconds to
turn on, then very bright.

I agree that a lot of CFLs are crap, particularly the ones that used to
be sold for 10p as some sort of energy efficiency drive.

Stupid pointless CFLs
 

On Monday, October 15, 2012 11:01:00 AM UTC+1, GB wrote:
On 15/10/2012 09:21, charles wrote:



you obviously had some very bad CFLs. I find that those made by Megaman

are good.



Philips Tornado bulbs are very good, too, but not cheap. 2 seconds to

turn on, then very bright.



I agree that a lot of CFLs are crap, particularly the ones that used to

be sold for 10p as some sort of energy efficiency drive.

I have found that the exposed spiral type 25 watt versions seem to be fine wherever they come from. The cheepos from tescos before the subsidies ended are OK for us, used to replace 60 watt tungsten.

I also have some free 11W stick types, and they are about as bright as a wax candle and take 30 seconds to get there. I have one in the under stairs cupboard and it is just about satisfactory !

Unfortunately my pile of 60W tungsten also from tescos seem to be crap and only last a couple of months - I wish I'd stockpiled with something decent like Philips.

Simon.

Stupid pointless CFLs
 

In article om,
brass monkey wrote:
Steve is correct, they're crap unless you use a string of them. As
normal replacements they don't cut it (unless you replace 40W candles
with 25W CFLs 'ish). In toilets they're completely useless (unless you
know when you'll be piddling and switch on beforehand).

And the amount of energy they save in a toilet - where the light won't be
on for long - totally pointless. Yet because they have such a poor
performance, many only fit them where they aren't much used, like toilets
and cupboards, etc.

--
*Windows will never cease *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Stupid pointless CFLs
 

On Monday, October 15, 2012 9:00:10 AM UTC+1, Steve Firth wrote:
meow2222 wrote:



So you didnt use enough wattage, and theyre all bad because of that. I'm

totally convinced.





You need to learn to read dumbass.

no I don't


I said the room was adequately lit with 100W of incandescent tungsten

lighting (4x25).



The 14W CFLs, largest wattage available in that package, were supposed

to be "equivalent" to 40W tungsten. They weren't they were equivalent to

12W tungsten at best. The 3W LED is at least as bright as the 25W

tungsten. It's an excellent bulb and also uses less electricity than the

CFL, which is ****. In all cases there are four (4) bulbs.



Was that too fast for the custard made with **** that someone filled

your skull with?

Abuse doesn't make your puerile proposal any truer.



BTW, your line length is ****ed, your post is double spaced because you

are using the "new" Google groups which is reserved for trolls and

morons. Which one are you? Or in your case is it "both"?

Its obvious you can't provide a fact and logic based case


NT

Stupid pointless CFLs
 

On 15 Oct 2012 10:30:53 GMT, Huge wrote:

On 2012-10-15, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article om,
brass monkey wrote:
Steve is correct, they're crap unless you use a string of them. As
normal replacements they don't cut it (unless you replace 40W candles
with 25W CFLs 'ish). In toilets they're completely useless (unless you
know when you'll be piddling and switch on beforehand).

And the amount of energy they save in a toilet - where the light won't be
on for long - totally pointless. Yet because they have such a poor
performance, many only fit them where they aren't much used, like toilets
and cupboards, etc.

I went back to GLS lamps in both toilets for this reason.

CFLs are ideal in the loft, though - the long lifetimes mean I don't have
to get up there to swap them very often, I don't have to look at them, the
poor quality of the light doesn't matter and they don't waste as much
'leccy when I forget and leave them switched on for days. (ObDIY; I really
must put a repeater lamp in the upstairs hall ceiling. A mains neon would
be ideal.)

Yes. It was when I discovered that I must have left two 100w bulbs
burning in the loft for about three months that I became an early
convert to CFLs. Needless to say, I never forgot again about swithing
off the loft lights.

Nick

Stupid pointless CFLs
 

On Mon, 15 Oct 2012 11:00:55 +0100, GB wrote:

On 15/10/2012 09:21, charles wrote:

you obviously had some very bad CFLs. I find that those made by Megaman
are good.

Philips Tornado bulbs are very good, too, but not cheap. 2 seconds to
turn on, then very bright.

I agree that a lot of CFLs are crap, particularly the ones that used to
be sold for 10p as some sort of energy efficiency drive.

Oi! I got a shed-load of 10p CFLs from Morrisons (in fact, IIRC, some were
as much as 5p) and they were all Philips Genie and are very good.

I agree that the ones with dubious provenance are crap - Prolite for
instance.
--
Peter.
The gods will stay away
whilst religions hold sway

Stupid pointless CFLs
 

On 15/10/2012 11:36, wrote:


Abuse doesn't make your puerile proposal any truer.
Its obvious you can't provide a fact and logic based case

It's Steve Firth. I genuinely believe that he can't help it.

Stupid pointless CFLs
 

wrote:
On Monday, October 15, 2012 9:00:10 AM UTC+1, Steve Firth wrote:
meow2222 wrote:



So you didnt use enough wattage, and theyre all bad because of that. I'm

totally convinced.





You need to learn to read dumbass.

no I don't


I said the room was adequately lit with 100W of incandescent tungsten

lighting (4x25).



The 14W CFLs, largest wattage available in that package, were supposed

to be "equivalent" to 40W tungsten. They weren't they were equivalent to

12W tungsten at best. The 3W LED is at least as bright as the 25W

tungsten. It's an excellent bulb and also uses less electricity than the

CFL, which is ****. In all cases there are four (4) bulbs.



Was that too fast for the custard made with **** that someone filled

your skull with?

Abuse doesn't make your puerile proposal any truer.



BTW, your line length is ****ed, your post is double spaced because you

are using the "new" Google groups which is reserved for trolls and

morons. Which one are you? Or in your case is it "both"?

Its obvious you can't provide a fact and logic based case

I just did you arsehole. It's clear that you can't read.


--
€¢DarWin|
_/ _/

Stupid pointless CFLs
 

Yes these free ones you get sent by energy companies are worth every penny
you pay for them.

Brian

--
Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email.
graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email:
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________


"Terry Fields" wrote in message
...

Steve Firth wrote:

Today, ****ed off with the gloom emitted by CFLs, I did a test replacing
downlighters with halogen and LED bulbs.

I didn't hold out much hope for the LEDs, 3W as replacements for 14W CFL
in
a fitting that used to provide good light with a 25W E25 reflector bulb.
The halogens were 20W.

Best bulb of the lot the 3W 16 x LED. Really bright. Good light dispersion
and a revelation after the poxy CFL. That's nailed the coffin on the CFLs,
living room now brightly lit with just 12W instead of inadequately lit
with
56W of CFL.

Anyone who bangs on at me about how great CFLs are in future will leave
with one stuck up his arse.

There was a recent sub-thread on the topic of the various merits of
tungsten vs. CFL vs LED on uk.legal.

Apparently some chap with a drawer full of free CFLs couldn't work out
that over the lifetime of the LEDs, the CFLs were costing him money,
let alone being able to see better after the inevitable CFL dimming
took place and the all-too-frequent first-use failure of his free
CFLs.


Terry Fields

Stupid pointless CFLs
 

On Monday, October 15, 2012 4:03:52 PM UTC+1, Steve Firth wrote:
meow2222 wrote:

On Monday, October 15, 2012 9:00:10 AM UTC+1, Steve Firth wrote:

meow2222 wrote:







So you didnt use enough wattage, and theyre all bad because of that. I'm



totally convinced.











You need to learn to read dumbass.



no I don't





I said the room was adequately lit with 100W of incandescent tungsten



lighting (4x25).







The 14W CFLs, largest wattage available in that package, were supposed



to be "equivalent" to 40W tungsten. They weren't they were equivalent to



12W tungsten at best. The 3W LED is at least as bright as the 25W



tungsten. It's an excellent bulb and also uses less electricity than the



CFL, which is ****. In all cases there are four (4) bulbs.







Was that too fast for the custard made with **** that someone filled



your skull with?



Abuse doesn't make your puerile proposal any truer.







BTW, your line length is ****ed, your post is double spaced because you



are using the "new" Google groups which is reserved for trolls and



morons. Which one are you? Or in your case is it "both"?



Its obvious you can't provide a fact and logic based case



I just did you arsehole. It's clear that you can't read.

If what you presented passes for fact & logic, your knowledge of reason and lighting are less than I expected.


NT

Stupid pointless CFLs
 

wrote:
On Monday, October 15, 2012 4:03:52 PM UTC+1, Steve Firth wrote:
[snip]

I just did you arsehole. It's clear that you can't read.

If what you presented passes for fact & logic, your knowledge of reason
and lighting are less than I expected.

If you claim that you read anything other than the part where I point out
that you're a dimwitted dickhead then you're a liar.

There was an entirely factual list of bulb types, wattages and commentary
on the dismal performance ofthe CFLs. Just because you have a bug up your
buttabout CFLs doesn't give you licence to deny that the material posted
ever existed.

And sort out your posts you self-obsessed tosspot.

--
€¢DarWin|
_/ _/

Stupid pointless CFLs
 

On 15/10/2012 11:30, Huge wrote:
On 2012-10-15, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article om,
brass monkey wrote:
Steve is correct, they're crap unless you use a string of them. As
normal replacements they don't cut it (unless you replace 40W candles
with 25W CFLs 'ish). In toilets they're completely useless (unless you
know when you'll be piddling and switch on beforehand).

And the amount of energy they save in a toilet - where the light won't be
on for long - totally pointless. Yet because they have such a poor
performance, many only fit them where they aren't much used, like toilets
and cupboards, etc.

I went back to GLS lamps in both toilets for this reason.

I have a stock in all the required sizes that will last me for some years.

CFLs are ideal in the loft, though

Not if you actually wish to see anything. Pukka fluorescent tubes are
the thing.




--
Old Codger
e-mail use reply to field

What matters in politics is not what happens, but what you can make
people believe has happened. [Janet Daley 27/8/2003]

Stupid pointless CFLs
 

On Monday, October 15, 2012 8:46:39 PM UTC+1, Steve Firth wrote:
wrote:



Seriously, if you want to make a credible case, start with the relevant

facts. Playing the fool doesn't achieve anything useful.



I did. All the relevant facts are there.

Congratulations on snipping a few of the relevant details I requested.


You're just acting like a child
because I pointed out that you're a ****.

I had hoped for the relevant details requested. Tell us, it would be more useful.


NT

Stupid pointless CFLs
 

Nick Odell wrote:

Yes. It was when I discovered that I must have left two 100w bulbs
burning in the loft for about three months that I became an early
convert to CFLs.

Yes, there's no way a CFL would run for 3 months solidly without failing!!

Scott

Stupid pointless CFLs
 

"Scott M" wrote in message
...
Nick Odell wrote:

Yes. It was when I discovered that I must have left two 100w bulbs
burning in the loft for about three months that I became an early
convert to CFLs.

Yes, there's no way a CFL would run for 3 months solidly without failing!!

Scott

I've actually had one running for 2 years solid. Before it died you could
just about see it.

Stupid pointless CFLs
 

On Wed, 17 Oct 2012 08:59:23 +0000, Huge wrote:

CFLs are fine. I rarely go up there, so the effort of fitting proper
fluorescents would be wasted.

Does.Not.Compute

I rarely go up into my loft but when I do I want to see clearly there!

(Pre-loved proper fluoro for that. Appropriately rated CFLs - up to 20W,
not the piddly little things they give away - most elsewhere.)


--
John Stumbles

Be who you are and say what you think because those who
mind don't matter and those who matter won't mind.

Stupid pointless CFLs
 

On Friday, October 19, 2012 12:11:10 PM UTC+1, John Stumbles wrote:
On Wed, 17 Oct 2012 08:59:23 +0000, Huge wrote:

I rarely go up into my loft but when I do I want to see clearly there!

(Pre-loved proper fluoro for that. Appropriately rated CFLs - up to 20W,
not the piddly little things they give away - most elsewhere.)

Loft is ideal for cfls that are no earthly use anywhere else. Just plug several in.


NT